« Topics
1234...212223
DVB Cornwall6,710 posts since 4 Dec 2003
Westcountry Spotlight
An awful lot depends on what the Spine contains, it's content will be critical, if it attacts some sporting rights, maybe the Conference for example which could generate some local interest it could work. The budgetary arrangements will be critical, as will be what it displaces on the Freeview EPG and line up of channels.
Ben3,271 posts since 5 Sep 2001
London London
Quite a lot like one of the original failed Channel 5 bids, which arguably would have come at a better time had it been successful. This idea sounds flawed to me, is it a local station or a national station with local opts? The latter is surely an old-fashioned idea?
www.tv-ark.org.uk
Andrew11,847 posts since 27 Mar 2001
Yorkshire Look North (Yorkshire)
To be honest any model behind a Channel 6 proposal isn't going to work.

We still see 14 years later that Channel 5 struggles to compete with the big boys and often seems comparable with ITV2 than Channel 4, and that is with populist programming.

A Channel 6 with PSB commitments will equal very low ratings.

Any money to be spent on this would be better being given to one of the existing broadcasters and ringfenced to produce this local programming.
trivialmatters534 posts since 15 Jan 2007
There are 100 reasons why this won't work and I am astounded that the idea has even been entertained.

The content will be poor, there's no demand for it, it's failed in Manchester... even a big network like ITV couldn't turn a profit operating numerous outdated regions, and they want to do even less regional stuff.

It's an utterly, utterly stupid idea.

Hunt has even admitted that the quality will be ****.

Quote:
seven out of 10 adults feel localness of stories is more important than them being professionally produced.
Nicky (previously BBCNicky) 2,896 posts since 4 Jan 2003
Yorkshire Look North (Yorkshire)
I don't know which is worse... ITV having it's cake and eating it or this sh*te idea from the government.

Any money to be spent on this would be better being given to one of the existing broadcasters and ringfenced to produce this local programming.


To be honest I think this idea sounds much better, no matter how "controversial" some may think it would be. Even giving that money to ITV not only to safeguard regional news and programming, but perhaps to slightly enhance the quality of such programming, would be more preferable than Hunt's thick, stupid plan. Let's hope his utterly crap idea is indeed scrapped.
trivialmatters534 posts since 15 Jan 2007
The other problem with this is that the idea is filled with contradictions.

Hunt has said "People in Barnham don't care what is happening in Southampton".

But by his own admission, there wouldn't be a station in Barnham because it's too small. The nearest viable station would probably be Southampton.

Also, it means ITV would be allowed to get rid of their local news offering, which means the people in Barnham wouldn't get ANY news, apart from the BBC's local offering.

It's also ludicrous to make the BBC pay for this rubbish. The public already pay for the BBC to make a quality local news provision. Why should the public spend a further £30million to make a duplicated, lower quality news provision?!

As for local programmes, the examples from "Witney TV" shown on Channel 4 included a programme about a local tree. Does anybody actually care? Does that draw in the ratings required to make it a commercial success?

If there is something interesting happening locally, for example let's say Cheryl Cole was switching on the local lights. Would I watch that on 'Channel 6'? No - I'd go to the bloody lights switch on down the road and watch it in person.

He also says it's "crazy" that Sheffield doesn't have a TV station, when it would do in America. The thing is, America is ENORMOUS. There'd be vast expanses of space in between Sheffield and the next city, making it worthy of a "local" TV station.

I'm actually in disbelief that this may happen.
trivialmatters534 posts since 15 Jan 2007
In summary then, £30million split between 12 stations to a bunch of people run by volunteers with no idea how to make TV, creating a self indulgent, low quality replication of something that already exists in a far superior form, broadcasting for 2 hours a day split screen with informercials and littered with local adverts... to a paltry, disinterested audience.
Last edited by trivialmatters on 20 January 2011 3:57pm